{"title":"当没有意志可以解释或沟通:在拉丁美洲的情况下,儿科安乐死在一个没有能力的未成年人与严重认知障碍的情况下。","authors":"Diego Borbón","doi":"10.1007/s11673-026-10610-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Colombia's Constitutional Court ruling T-057 of 2025 addresses one of the most morally demanding questions in contemporary bioethics: whether surrogate-requested euthanasia can ever be justified for a patient who has never possessed decisional and communicational capacity. The case concerned Mateo, a sixteen-year-old adolescent with refractory epilepsy, severe dystonia, and profound cognitive disability, whose mother requested euthanasia on his behalf. The Court denied the specific request while disapplying as unconstitutional the blanket exclusion of minors with intellectual disabilities from euthanasia access and ordered comprehensive palliative care and regulatory reform. This article examines the case within Colombia's unique judge-made assisted death framework-one of the few systems globally constructed entirely through judicial decisions without enabling legislation-and surveys the comparative international landscape through six ethical lenses: principlism, care ethics, disability rights, Catholic bioethics, secular liberalism, and human rights law. The paper also briefly reviews the new Resolution 813 of 2026 that has since excluded never-competent patients from euthanasia despite the Constitutional Court orders. It concludes with a nuanced assessment: a legal order committed to human dignity cannot indefinitely condemn a minor to immense observable suffering without therapeutic prospects, yet such a position demands extraordinary procedural protection for human rights and patients' rights.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When No Will Can Be Interpreted or Communicated: Paediatric Euthanasia in a Case of a Never-Competent Minor with Profound Cognitive Disability in a Latin American Context.\",\"authors\":\"Diego Borbón\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11673-026-10610-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Colombia's Constitutional Court ruling T-057 of 2025 addresses one of the most morally demanding questions in contemporary bioethics: whether surrogate-requested euthanasia can ever be justified for a patient who has never possessed decisional and communicational capacity. The case concerned Mateo, a sixteen-year-old adolescent with refractory epilepsy, severe dystonia, and profound cognitive disability, whose mother requested euthanasia on his behalf. The Court denied the specific request while disapplying as unconstitutional the blanket exclusion of minors with intellectual disabilities from euthanasia access and ordered comprehensive palliative care and regulatory reform. This article examines the case within Colombia's unique judge-made assisted death framework-one of the few systems globally constructed entirely through judicial decisions without enabling legislation-and surveys the comparative international landscape through six ethical lenses: principlism, care ethics, disability rights, Catholic bioethics, secular liberalism, and human rights law. The paper also briefly reviews the new Resolution 813 of 2026 that has since excluded never-competent patients from euthanasia despite the Constitutional Court orders. It concludes with a nuanced assessment: a legal order committed to human dignity cannot indefinitely condemn a minor to immense observable suffering without therapeutic prospects, yet such a position demands extraordinary procedural protection for human rights and patients' rights.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50252,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-026-10610-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-026-10610-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
When No Will Can Be Interpreted or Communicated: Paediatric Euthanasia in a Case of a Never-Competent Minor with Profound Cognitive Disability in a Latin American Context.
Colombia's Constitutional Court ruling T-057 of 2025 addresses one of the most morally demanding questions in contemporary bioethics: whether surrogate-requested euthanasia can ever be justified for a patient who has never possessed decisional and communicational capacity. The case concerned Mateo, a sixteen-year-old adolescent with refractory epilepsy, severe dystonia, and profound cognitive disability, whose mother requested euthanasia on his behalf. The Court denied the specific request while disapplying as unconstitutional the blanket exclusion of minors with intellectual disabilities from euthanasia access and ordered comprehensive palliative care and regulatory reform. This article examines the case within Colombia's unique judge-made assisted death framework-one of the few systems globally constructed entirely through judicial decisions without enabling legislation-and surveys the comparative international landscape through six ethical lenses: principlism, care ethics, disability rights, Catholic bioethics, secular liberalism, and human rights law. The paper also briefly reviews the new Resolution 813 of 2026 that has since excluded never-competent patients from euthanasia despite the Constitutional Court orders. It concludes with a nuanced assessment: a legal order committed to human dignity cannot indefinitely condemn a minor to immense observable suffering without therapeutic prospects, yet such a position demands extraordinary procedural protection for human rights and patients' rights.
期刊介绍:
The JBI welcomes both reports of empirical research and articles that increase theoretical understanding of medicine and health care, the health professions and the biological sciences. The JBI is also open to critical reflections on medicine and conventional bioethics, the nature of health, illness and disability, the sources of ethics, the nature of ethical communities, and possible implications of new developments in science and technology for social and cultural life and human identity. We welcome contributions from perspectives that are less commonly published in existing journals in the field and reports of empirical research studies using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies.
The JBI accepts contributions from authors working in or across disciplines including – but not limited to – the following:
-philosophy-
bioethics-
economics-
social theory-
law-
public health and epidemiology-
anthropology-
psychology-
feminism-
gay and lesbian studies-
linguistics and discourse analysis-
cultural studies-
disability studies-
history-
literature and literary studies-
environmental sciences-
theology and religious studies